Listen to Jason Miller's interview with Tom Sharpe.

The General Services Administration is attempting to clarify to managers and
vendors alike the proper approach to overseeing the schedules program.

A February memo and policy is part of the way GSA's Federal Acquisition Service is
trying to address a 2013 inspector general report that found examples of improper
management interference on decisions by contracting officers under the schedules
program.

"We've taken a number of actions to reinforce proper procurement while also
focusing on doing more for our customers to save them time and money in
acquisition," said Tom Sharpe, commissioner of GSA's Federal Acquisition Service,
in an exclusive interview with Federal News Radio. "We've moved out on training.
We've moved out on providing tools for the multiple award schedules, and we are in
the process of standardizing part numbers, instilling horizontal pricing pressure.
The schedules are priced vertically, the most favored customer price, so we are
looking at comparison across suppliers to provide horizontal pricing pressure, and
we've taken on initiatives to make the processes within the multiple award
schedules faster."

In June, the GSA IG found FAS managers improperly interfered with
negotiations for new schedule contracts for Carahsoft, Deloitte and Oracle. GSA
executives ended up suspending one senior official in light of what the IG
found and have been taking steps over the last nine months to clarify and
reinforce the role of managers in schedule contract negotiations.

"To me, the role of management is to support and reinforce those contracting
officers," said Sharpe, who has served as a contracting officer, a contracting
officer supervisor and in several other acquisition operations positions during
his career. "Contracting officers have difficult jobs and make subjective
decisions, and the role of management is obviously to hire, to mentor, to
supervise or to guide, to be a point of escalation to resolve issues, and quite
frankly when it's on the other side when there is an issue to support and correct
a contracting officer. ... I'm holding management responsible to fulfill that
role, and I won't tolerate improper intervention or improper execution of that
role. In fact, every executive in FAS holds in their performance plan an outcome
of proper procurement and proper procurement controls in fiscal 2014."

Record and file it away

The instructional guidance requires contracting officers to document all
communications with vendors, members of Congress and their staffs and any other
interested party. Additionally, the contracting officer must document any
discussions with managers outside of the business portfolio's business control
process.

"What folks should take away from it is, the memo expressed support for the
contracting officers and the very important difficult jobs they do. So I expressed
my support," Sharpe said. "The second thing I would suggest be taken away from it
is, there is a proper role for management, and management is accountable for
proper procurement and for supporting our contracting officers. The third is how
important price is, and how important getting the best price possible on behalf of
our customers to save them, in this instance, money, but also time."

These documentation requirements don't address the real problems — only the
symptoms, said Roger Waldron, president of the Coalition for Government
Procurement.

The CGP was one of three industry associations who wrote to Sharpe last
June, expressing concerns over the IG's recommendations and the steps GSA
initially took to resolve the findings.

"The acquisition letter and guidance about documentation about contacts and going
up the chain, doesn't from CGP's perspective address concerns raised in our letter
and potential suggestions we made for how to handle situations where contractor
wants to raise concerns about the negotiation process," Waldron said. "We made
suggestions about having a schedules' ombudsman to handle potential problems. We
suggested fixing the pricing policy. It's outdated, going back 40 years and is
product based. Outdated policies make for challenges, especially when applying
them to current contracts, and they create questions of interpretations among
contracting officers and acquisition centers."

Waldron said the pricing policy based on the price reduction clause is the biggest
problem that needs to be addressed. He said vendors do not have a way to escalate
concerns to find creative solutions.

Sharpe said good procurement is always about "Why this source?" and "Why this
price?" He said the horizontal pricing pressure, reverse auctions and several
other things are aimed at driving the best prices possible.

IG conflict of interest?

Waldron said all the talk about price is fine as long as there is a way to solve
disagreements over what is the best price.